From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/10799 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "A. Wilcox" Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Handling of L and ll prefixes different from glibc Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 22:01:59 -0600 Organization: =?UTF-8?Q?Ad=c3=a9lie_Linux?= Message-ID: <585215B7.2070507@adelielinux.org> References: <20161214161348.GU1555@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20161214171756.GH16379@port70.net> <5851C9C3.6050609@adelielinux.org> <20161215023042.GW1555@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1481774549 20386 195.159.176.226 (15 Dec 2016 04:02:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 04:02:29 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-10812-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Dec 15 05:02:25 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cHNFP-00045e-CF for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 05:02:23 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 1399 invoked by uid 550); 15 Dec 2016 04:02:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 1371 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2016 04:02:25 -0000 X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 In-Reply-To: <20161215023042.GW1555@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:10799 Archived-At: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 14/12/16 20:30, Rich Felker wrote: > It's true that some programs which are just misusing printf format > specifiers as part of unnecessary status/debug/junk output will > fully work now, despite having UB, and that they would stop working > with such a change. But in most cases, the lack of output now, even > if it's unnoticed, is a bug that could have serious consequences. > For example missing output in text that's parsed and used in a > script can lead to things like rm -rf'ing the wrong directory. So I > tend to think always failing hard and catching the bug is > preferable. Yeah, I can understand that. Just makes me nervous as a package maintainer is all :) > BTW I wonder if gcc's -Wformat catches these errors. It is meant to. I know that clang whines loudly on mismatched format specifiers, and I seem to recall it even whines on format specifiers that don't exist, but it has been a while since I checked GCC's. - --arw - -- A. Wilcox (awilfox) Project Lead, Adélie Linux http://adelielinux.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYUhWyAAoJEMspy1GSK50UX9QP/0EhqwhljRAm3yY5Glhl2emt R0FtBYsHHDhnqkjPJ4AWV3z6eVCPb2nd9RZYGpj778rFl/nOijfR8ilzUL7sKYGJ KXiBx5N0cOWpm75RWGKwvAEEkoC4zqQZ4HbyK13RzWdO6rJPieb137UW7sKw+S7C I7S4PRbd09pBd9Uk1smDEEknbLxDwUbARJaFOuChzzGgZU0AOfnSg7FgOGEPv+va 1dBB98gIAcMkhSOy3xBZsMZWr0frpXiym119Y2IHP56xkoIQGN585ChluEWa54tt pHEXYsDIT5ZOMMdZqIbllI3mFILopZ3PalrBiLTKwqqnAyhkRyZNWTTTxtdm7aNx iARmCXupxk1boNYjBcsQhc25EZg6tRUebHveSKfoDxKALRu+YGtEcWg+um/29L78 Jz1G4D9nAExoUVBKGkxxG6VlTEUBdmVd6pCWdm08GzX0QJaq0aA1KBK+0lexDluV eqZfG+J40bwWhFuI3hNpKy46UHs+mDPgGPzCaGWupMAYaYLAo5UCnMqIAOSFMWed hwwNlwUCA8hwjXcq6nsWa3B2lIt5LmioAfZQ4+8WtiEfU5Kwzjw66olSF1uwdNMh q4g7Sju81oUOWEFId7Dy+zBah5XZt+nyRL/6QSob9WKz5hXb30WZinHH6M+m1z4F RAPqzt4nfGqMhRfBY2vL =5CdV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----